Hi and thanks for visiting the best Ravens forum on the planet. You do not have to be a member to browse the various forums, but in order to post and interact with your purple brethren, you will have to **register**. It only takes a couple of minutes. You can also use your Facebook account to log in....just click on the blue 'FConnect' link at the very top of the page.

Hybrid View

Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

Per PFT, which quotes Preston (I know), Harbaugh wanted Reed gone supposedly because Reed led that "mutiny" along with Pollard. Of course, Harbs would never publicly say he wanted Reed gone, and Pollard has already taken issue with the mutiny idea, but supposedly there was no bidding war.

Don't know how much truth there is to these reports (consider the sources), but it's not unthinkable to me that Harbs did not really want an old, injury-prone, feast-or-famine player who cost the Ravens a lot of money. Just irrelevant and speculative at this point, though. The move's done, Reed's gone, and the secondary and whole team will probably benefit from it in the long run.

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

Everything ive head in interviews was nothing but respect, both ways. Harbs said nothing but good things about Reed, which youd expect, and Reed went out of his way to give Harbs props. Both said they talked frequently during the process. If that wasnt true I cant see Reed doing that. To me that points to them at worst amicably separating. whether that was Harbs saying he respected him but wanted to move on is another story, one thats not really going to come to light.

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

John Harbaugh probably did want Ed Reed gone. If Ed Reed were in his prime, however, Harbaugh probably would have put up with the issue or tried to make it work. However, since Reed's skills were declining, the decision was easy.

"When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

Originally Posted by akashicrecorder

Per PFT, which quotes Preston (I know), Harbaugh wanted Reed gone supposedly because Reed led that "mutiny" along with Pollard. Of course, Harbs would never publicly say he wanted Reed gone, and Pollard has already taken issue with the mutiny idea, but supposedly there was no bidding war.

Don't know how much truth there is to these reports (consider the sources), but it's not unthinkable to me that Harbs did not really want an old, injury-prone, feast-or-famine player who cost the Ravens a lot of money. Just irrelevant and speculative at this point, though. The move's done, Reed's gone, and the secondary and whole team will probably benefit from it in the long run.

Preston is a Skip Bayless wannabe. An attention mongering halfwit who is smart enough to realize that in terms of writing talent he is outgunned, so he utilizes polarizing viewpoints to generate interest in his articles and opinions.

Far as John wanting Ed gone perhaps it is true. It could be true though that he real reason the wanted Ed gone was because he got tired of watching Ed try to shoulder tackle and escort guys out of bounds. Perhaps he decided that Ed's limitations outweighed the things he still could bring to the table. Every player is judged in this way. Its the reality of a salary cap. You cant just spend money and keep guys around just out of reverence. If there is any interest in bringing back Ed you set a number and stick to it. Based on his play and what Huff got to sign here that number was at best 2-2.5 million and that IMO is showing Ed some reverence even offering that much. If the Texans want to pay for the name then so be it. I love Ed, he is my favorite Raven but the Ravens would have been nuts to bid on Ed with the pricetag the Texans set.

Even if Ed had no hand in the mutiny or even had he been instrumental in squashing it the decision they reached on him would have been the same IMO. They were never paying that much for Ed unless they had Bengal cap space to burn and they do not obviously.

“A linebacker's job is to knock out running backs, to knock out receivers, to chase the football,”
-Ray Lewis

Erm, why? Harbaugh doesn't call plays on either side of the ball, he's not some schematic guru who has built a roster and made top draft picks specifically to play his scheme, his record of picking coordinators is dodgy at best, and the Ravens are a premier organization. I'm not saying he's a bad coach, but let's not pretend that the Ravens would have a difficult time getting someone who could have similar success under the circumstances if they decided they want to go a new route.

He never said it was due to luck. He just said that he brings no special acumen to the table as a HC on either side of the ball. He doesn't get involved in scheming for opponents. He doesn't call plays. So what does he offer that makes him irreplaceable?

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

Originally Posted by Terpsfan82

He never said it was due to luck. He just said that he brings no special acumen to the table as a HC on either side of the ball. He doesn't get involved in scheming for opponents. He doesn't call plays. So what does he offer that makes him irreplaceable?

He gets the right people in the right places and provides whatever it is they need to succeed. True leadership at the HC level is not easily seen or defined - it show up in W's and L's.

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

If putting together a successful team were simply about having a good OC and DC and a faceless puppet as HC, more teams would be successful. There has to be something that Harbaugh does really well that makes him a much better coach then say Romeo Crennel, Charlie Weis, Eric Mangini or the countless other coaches who are good at calling plays but suck at managing teams.

Re: Rumor: Harbs wanted Reed gone

Originally Posted by Justlovemybirds

If putting together a successful team were simply about having a good OC and DC and a faceless puppet as HC, more teams would be successful. There has to be something that Harbaugh does really well that makes him a much better coach then say Romeo Crennel, Charlie Weis, Eric Mangini or the countless other coaches who are good at calling plays but suck at managing teams.

I really want to make it clear that my whole line of reasoning there was really meant to be that I think Harbaugh is too good of a coach to do something so petty, i.e. that the story being presented just doesn't strike me as credible. The "replaceable" bit was a sort of "how would you act if you were this guy's boss" query. I wasn't trying to say Harbaugh isn't a good head coach or imply the Ravens should get rid of him.